321 



JOU>NMi OF FORTIOtLrDRE AND OOTTAGE GABDENEK. 



[ May 3, 1877. 



allow it full extension root and brancb, and treat the pyramid 

 as a pyramid — restrict it if need be root and branch. Com- 

 pare the performances of the two. In no other way can con- 

 vincing proof be had. Do not plant a pyramid of a kind that 

 requires a wall, and at the same time plant a standard of a 

 kind known to succeed as sucb, but choose identical kinds, 

 and we may safely await the issue. Onr forefathers appro- 

 priated wall space by planting of "riders" between the stations 

 of the permanent trees, and Mr. Elvers has shown how to 

 economise space in the open. I find that the trees I planted 

 seven years ago for covering space are not nearly so satisfactory 

 as the upright-trained trees planted between them and re- 

 stricted. Then I planted trees in an orchard 24 feet and 

 pyramids in the garden at C feet apart, and the produce of the 

 latter in any year after the second has equalled that of the 

 former — the one form of tree occupying 4 square yards and 

 the other 64. 



These remarks apply only to Apples and Pears producing 

 their fruit upon spurs, very few forming fruit buds upon the 

 current year's growth. The extension system applied to Pears 

 and Apples on the bush or pyramid form is, as far as I have 

 noticed, marked by sterility. We know what form a tree 

 would grow into if left to its own way. No one accustomed 

 to shapely trees would tolerate such objects or the grower of 

 them, for the owners know a handsomely trained tree will pro- 

 duce as fine fruit as an ugly one. I admit pruning may be 

 carried to au extreme. No pruning will bring a very vigorous 

 tree into bearing except root-pruning, and if the latter be not 

 contemplated it is almost useless to plant fruit trees in highly 

 cultivated ground and restrict the growth by pruning. It is 

 all very well, as an excuse for negligent pruning, to point to 

 occasional prodigious crops as produced by the extension-neg- 

 lect-system, as compared with the restrictive-cultural-system. 

 If better crops and better fruits are had by allowing trees to 

 grow naturally, then we are wrong in our ideas of walla for 

 shelter and warmth , and our pyramids and espaliers are delusions. 

 Why not at once tell us these things are better understood by 

 the cottager who allows his tree to take to itself natural ways, 

 that trees require no praning beyond that of shears or a saw, 

 and no training beyond a holdfast now and then to maintain a 

 reclining branch from snapping ? That fruit trees against 

 the wall of a cottage or farmhouse are sometimes laden with 

 fruit when the trees in private gardens fail I admit, but that it 

 is due to the neglect of pruniog and training I deny. The 

 di£ferencB arises mainly from the comparatively poor soil in the 

 one case, as compared with that of the heavily-manured fruit 

 border in the other. The same remarks apply to orchard trees ; 

 they have a firm soil, its surface is not disturbed, and manure 

 is rarely applied. It is very different with trees upon the re- 

 strictive system. They are well manured, and if they do not 

 bear fruit they produce much wood, but when brought into a 

 bearing state by judicious lifting or root-pruning they are as 

 prolific of fruit for their size as the other, and the fruit of the 

 cultivated trees is mostly superior. 



Training in the matter of Pears has much to do with the 

 fruitfulness of the trees. Because some observe that the ex- 

 tension parts of the tree are the more fruitful — the part near 

 the stem of the tree and for some distance along the main 

 branches being plentiful in wood but scant of crop — it is con- 

 cluded that extension is required. Horizontal training has 

 come much into vogue ; it is not of a kind calculated to an 

 equalisation of the sap, which traverses horizontal parts much 

 less freely than upright, and this accounts for horizontal- 

 trained trees being most fruitful near the extremity of the 

 branches, and put out so much wood near the stem and upper 

 parts of the trees. The tree wants to be up. In fan-training 

 there is not nearly so much wood produced near the stem, the 

 sap is more regularly diffused, and the vigour of the tree is 

 more equal. — G. Abbey. 



CALANDEINIAS. 

 As low-growing, densely-flowering, riohly-oolonrcd plants for 

 sunny rockeries, few are more suitable than Calandrinias. 

 They are admirable also for window-box and vase decoration, 

 and are pretty when grown in pots for the front row in the 

 greenhouse. C. umbellata is, perhaps, the best of them, and 

 this when well grown and llowering under the tun's rays is 

 extremely rich. The flowers are crimson shot with purple, 

 and are so numerous as to quite cover the plant. The plants 

 thrive admirably when planted near the margin of a sunny 

 border, bat they do not usually stand the winter except when 



partially sheltered and well drained. Plants are readily raised 

 from seed, and flower freely the first year. The seed should 

 be sown as soon as pofsible in the spring, raising the plants in 

 a heated frame. When large enough they may be pricked-off 

 three in a 60-sized pot, or five in a 48, and be grown near the 

 glass and gradually hardened-off. They will flower during the 

 summer. If the plants which are grown in pots are wintered 

 in a frame or cool greenhouse they will flower early and pro- 

 fusely during the following spring. That is perhaps the most 

 satisfactory way of growing them — keeping them in 48-pots 

 throughout the first summer and winter, then planting them 

 out if required. C. umbellata does not grow more than inches 

 high, but G. discolor and C. grandiflora grow a foot in height. 

 The dwatfer species is the more attractive ; indeed it is one of 

 the best of low-growing plants for the purposes named. — 

 Amatedb, Matlock. 



KOYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 



Mat 2nd. 

 SUMMER SHOW— VISIT OP THE QUEEN. 



When it is considered with what readiness the various mem- 

 bers of the Royal Family extend their patronage to anything 

 which promotes the national weal — the alacrity with which they 

 countenance objects of benevolence ; the willingness they dis- 

 play iu fostering art in its various phases ; and even their dis- 

 position to recognise the national sports and pastimes — it is only 

 natural that the great industry of horticulture, combining as it 

 does art with utility, should have a share of that Royal patron- 

 age which is so stimulating in its effects and so powerful in its 

 bcEeficial influence. 



Than horticulture no industry contributes more to the whole- 

 some pleasures of life, and none renders other substantial neces- 

 sities more enjoyable. Both in the mansions of the rich and 

 the homes of the poor horticnlture ministers by its supply, not 

 of vegetables aud fruit only, but also of flowers. The extent of 

 the great industry of ornamental plants was fittingly exemplified 

 on this auspicious occasion. Plants for the wealthy were staged 

 in magnificent prof asion by those whose reputation for horti- 

 cultural skill and enterprise have become proverbial, and plants 

 for the million were similarly represented by those connected 

 with the important branch of popular iloricultnre. 



Since the great exhibition coimuemoralive of the appointment 

 of the present Council we have had many admirable displays to 

 notice at South Ivensiugtcn, but not one so extensive, so varied, 

 and so rich as the expression of loyalty of yesterday— loyalty to 

 horticulture, to the Koyal Horticultural Society, and to the 

 Queen. 



For a length of time it appeared as if the sun of the Royal 

 Horticultural Society was declining, but latterly the prospect 

 has brightened, and week by week and month by month im- 

 provement has gone steadily on, support has been increasingly 

 given, confidence has been gradually restored. The policy 

 followed has not been a starthng policy but a safe one, and that 

 it has also been sound is sufiiciently attested by the results now 

 achieved. The prestige of the Society has been so far restored 

 as to merit the reward of a Royal visit, and the efforts of exhi- 

 bitors have been such as to render the display worthy of its 

 illustrious patrons. Let us regard the Exhibition in whatever 

 aspect we may — whether iu reference to the rarity and value 

 of the plants, their artistic grouping, their superiority of culture, 

 and their immense number — we must describe the Show as the 

 finest that has been seen iu London tor many years. 



An idea of the magnitude of the display may be gathered frcm 

 the fact that the various groups occupied space and staging 

 averaging about Sfeet in width and fully half a mile in length; 

 and iu addition to the plants were fruit (of which the Grapes and 

 Pines were splendid), vegetables, bouquets, and table decorations. 



The various collections were arranged in the corridors and 

 conservatory. The products of the Co vent Garden growers and 

 vendors, which were remarkable for high quality, occupied the 

 whole of the long eastern corridor, also part of the eastern wing 

 of the conservatory, which together are more than a thousand 

 feet in length ; the nurserymen's and amateurs' contributions 

 were displayed in the conservatory and western corridor, occupy- 

 ing about the same extent of space as the "market produce." 

 We will first describe the ooUectious last mentioned as having 

 contributed powertuUy, as our continental friends say, " to the 

 splendour of the Exhibition." 



Abrival ok the Queen. — Her Majesty arrived at the Exhibi- 

 tion by the Queen's Gate entrance shortly before twelve o'clock. 

 The Royal party, which included Princess Beatrice, the DuchesB 

 of Edinburgh, the Duchess of Teck, &c., was conducted round 

 the E xhibition by the President, Lord Aberdare ; the Vice-Presi- 

 dents, Lord Alfred S. Churchill, Col. Trevor Clarke, and Mr. 



